Can you run the record with the -v flag to verify that the 191 skips are not just Makefile changes?
I'll see if I can reproduce this here. Basically after each response it re-filters the possible and not-possible set of patches before issuing the next prompt, so the 's'kip on the adddir should have removed anything dependent on adddir at that point and not later than that. I assume that sincd the icons directory was new that all the files in it were adds as well; this may indicate some indistinct patch dependency relationship between an added directory and its contents. -KQ On 30 Jan 2008, at 4:59 AM, Eric Kow wrote: > > > Hi Kevin, > > Could you have a second look at this? I don't think this is quite > the correct > interaction... (below, icons is a directory with a lot of files). > > adddir ./icons > Shall I record this change? (1/?) [ynWsfvpxdaqjkc], or ? for help: s > hunk ./Makefile 6 > +pack : reg2008-pack.tex > + latex2html -no_subdir -init_file pack2html.pl -split 4 $< > + cp my-$(basename $(<F)).css $(basename $(<F)).css > + > Shall I record this change? (2/199) [ynWsfvpxdaqjk], or ? for help: f > Included record of 191 changes due to dependencies. > > ---------- > status: resolved-in-unstable -> chatting > > __________________________________ > Darcs bug tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <http://bugs.darcs.net/issue568> > __________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > darcs-devel mailing list > darcs-devel@darcs.net > http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel _______________________________________________ darcs-devel mailing list darcs-devel@darcs.net http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel